Future Carrier (Including Costs)
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,213
Likes: 1,648
From: Ferrara
It's not well known but the US effort to produce an aeromagnetic map of the major oceans in the '50's by flying (mainly) Neptunes back and forth and recording their MAD kit was a major piece of the information which led to the revolution of Global Plate Tectonics in the mid-60's in the Earth Sciences.
And in the early '70's the Russians seemed very interested in producing detailed gravity maps of various parts of the world such as N Africa and the Middle East - totally unconnected with the military I'm sure - but there were some people in C London who seemed very interested and exercised by the idea as well.
And in the early '70's the Russians seemed very interested in producing detailed gravity maps of various parts of the world such as N Africa and the Middle East - totally unconnected with the military I'm sure - but there were some people in C London who seemed very interested and exercised by the idea as well.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,510
Likes: 7,255
From: Peripatetic
Scottish noses out of joint, but as Lord Coaker says, it’s a decision for SERCO as the contract holder who they contract to build their ships, not the MOD.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/mini...val-tug-fleet/
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/mini...val-tug-fleet/
Ministers ‘blindsided’ by offshore award of naval tug fleet
Concerns about the decision to place the Defence Maritime Services replacement fleet with Damen have now been sharpened by new ministerial answers confirming that British shipyards were not even invited to bid for the work.
The issue surfaced at industry discussions at Holyrood and also in written responses at Westminster, and together they paint a picture of a procurement system that allows major small vessel orders to pass offshore with limited scrutiny and little strategic intent.
At the Scottish Parliament’s Cross Party Group on Maritime and Shipbuilding, participants questioned how a 24 vessel programme ended up in the hands of a Dutch yard currently under investigation for alleged sanctions breaches involving Russia. Those present argued that the boats are central to daily operations at Clyde, Devonport and Portsmouth and fall squarely within the capabilities of several UK builders. They also warned that outsourcing through private service providers has become a route through which industrial opportunities quietly disappear.
Paul Sweeney MSP, convenor of the Cross Party Group, said ministers had been taken by surprise by the outcome of the process. “I think it’s fair to say that UK Government ministers were blindsided by the decision by Serco to award the 24 vessel contract for workboats to Damen,” he said, referring to the Defence Maritime Services Next Generation vessel replacement programme covering the three main naval bases at Clyde, Devonport and Portsmouth.
Sweeney argued that the decision ran directly counter to the National Shipbuilding Strategy. “It’s clear that the goal of the National Shipbuilding Strategy is to maximise the cross government shipbuilding pipeline over the next 30 years and convert that into a UK demand signal for shipbuilding. This militates against it,” he said. He added that the vessels involved, including tugs, crane barges and pilot boats, were exactly the type of ships that UK yards are well placed to deliver. “These are vessels that would be well suited to UK yards,” he said.
He also raised concerns about the ongoing criminal investigations involving Damen. “The other consideration is the ongoing investigation into the directors of Damen and alleged breaches of sanctions against Russia, particularly through their yards in Romania, and the potential risk there,” Sweeney said. He described the situation as serious and damaging. “With the trial underway and further investigations relating to bribery, forgery and money laundering, it’s really reputationally problematic for this contract to continue,” he added.
While acknowledging that ministers are now engaging with Serco, Sweeney argued that more decisive action was required. “I would like to see this work brought into the UK under a subcontract, or the contract essentially pulled and re awarded to a UK shipbuilder,” he said.
Sweeney pointed to the immediate pressures facing Ferguson Marine as an example of why intervention matters. “There is an imminent risk to Ferguson Marine,” he said, warning that even if a direct award for a new ferry is made later this year, the yard still faces a significant gap in workload once Glen Rosa is delivered. “There are huge risks with people leaving the shipyard due to lack of orders and uncertainty. People are already leaving as we speak,” he said. He noted that mobilisation on a further ferry would not begin in earnest until late next year, leaving a prolonged period of underutilisation.
He argued that construction of workboats for the DMS programme could provide timely infill work. “I think it could be perfect infill work to do these Damen tugs under subcontract at Ferguson Marine in Port Glasgow,” he said, pointing to existing precedents for workshare arrangements involving Damen on other UK projects. “We should really press hard on a deal for workshare for Ferguson’s. Getting tug boats constructed there would be a perfect short term solution,” he added.
The written answers from defence minister Lord Coaker set out the official position. He explained that “the Defence Marine Services Next Generation programme did not seek tenders directly for the Vessel Replacement Programme” because the shipbuilding element was embedded within a wider In Port Services contract. Bidders were therefore free to select their own suppliers. Coaker confirmed that “there was no policy requirement to engage for this procurement” and that the Ministry of Defence has no record of discussions with the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions. Only one compliant bid was received for the overall services contract, leaving Serco to select Damen without direct government involvement.
Coaker also addressed the legal and financial issues. He said the MoD is aware of the Dutch proceedings and “will take appropriate action should a conviction occur.” He stated that Serco had assessed Damen and found “no immediate risk to delivery of the Vessel Replacement Programme,” while confirming that monitoring will continue. The minister emphasised that the MoD holds no direct contract with Damen. The subcontract is valued at around two hundred million pounds, roughly twenty two percent of the overall In Port Services package. Coaker argued that British yards would still benefit from around two hundred million pounds of maintenance work, though this has done little to reassure those concerned about the loss of higher value newbuild activity.
The discussion at Holyrood stressed that a fleet of this size could have provided several years of steady output for UK yards and helped sustain skills between major naval programmes. Comparisons were drawn with countries that deliberately use small vessel orders to stabilise their shipbuilding sectors. The procurement structure, rather than an explicit political decision, created the conditions for the work to go overseas. Once shipbuilding is embedded inside service contracts, ministers lose the ability to apply industrial priorities even when these align with stated policy objectives.
Concerns about the decision to place the Defence Maritime Services replacement fleet with Damen have now been sharpened by new ministerial answers confirming that British shipyards were not even invited to bid for the work.
The issue surfaced at industry discussions at Holyrood and also in written responses at Westminster, and together they paint a picture of a procurement system that allows major small vessel orders to pass offshore with limited scrutiny and little strategic intent.
At the Scottish Parliament’s Cross Party Group on Maritime and Shipbuilding, participants questioned how a 24 vessel programme ended up in the hands of a Dutch yard currently under investigation for alleged sanctions breaches involving Russia. Those present argued that the boats are central to daily operations at Clyde, Devonport and Portsmouth and fall squarely within the capabilities of several UK builders. They also warned that outsourcing through private service providers has become a route through which industrial opportunities quietly disappear.
Paul Sweeney MSP, convenor of the Cross Party Group, said ministers had been taken by surprise by the outcome of the process. “I think it’s fair to say that UK Government ministers were blindsided by the decision by Serco to award the 24 vessel contract for workboats to Damen,” he said, referring to the Defence Maritime Services Next Generation vessel replacement programme covering the three main naval bases at Clyde, Devonport and Portsmouth.
Sweeney argued that the decision ran directly counter to the National Shipbuilding Strategy. “It’s clear that the goal of the National Shipbuilding Strategy is to maximise the cross government shipbuilding pipeline over the next 30 years and convert that into a UK demand signal for shipbuilding. This militates against it,” he said. He added that the vessels involved, including tugs, crane barges and pilot boats, were exactly the type of ships that UK yards are well placed to deliver. “These are vessels that would be well suited to UK yards,” he said.
He also raised concerns about the ongoing criminal investigations involving Damen. “The other consideration is the ongoing investigation into the directors of Damen and alleged breaches of sanctions against Russia, particularly through their yards in Romania, and the potential risk there,” Sweeney said. He described the situation as serious and damaging. “With the trial underway and further investigations relating to bribery, forgery and money laundering, it’s really reputationally problematic for this contract to continue,” he added.
While acknowledging that ministers are now engaging with Serco, Sweeney argued that more decisive action was required. “I would like to see this work brought into the UK under a subcontract, or the contract essentially pulled and re awarded to a UK shipbuilder,” he said.
Sweeney pointed to the immediate pressures facing Ferguson Marine as an example of why intervention matters. “There is an imminent risk to Ferguson Marine,” he said, warning that even if a direct award for a new ferry is made later this year, the yard still faces a significant gap in workload once Glen Rosa is delivered. “There are huge risks with people leaving the shipyard due to lack of orders and uncertainty. People are already leaving as we speak,” he said. He noted that mobilisation on a further ferry would not begin in earnest until late next year, leaving a prolonged period of underutilisation.
He argued that construction of workboats for the DMS programme could provide timely infill work. “I think it could be perfect infill work to do these Damen tugs under subcontract at Ferguson Marine in Port Glasgow,” he said, pointing to existing precedents for workshare arrangements involving Damen on other UK projects. “We should really press hard on a deal for workshare for Ferguson’s. Getting tug boats constructed there would be a perfect short term solution,” he added.
The written answers from defence minister Lord Coaker set out the official position. He explained that “the Defence Marine Services Next Generation programme did not seek tenders directly for the Vessel Replacement Programme” because the shipbuilding element was embedded within a wider In Port Services contract. Bidders were therefore free to select their own suppliers. Coaker confirmed that “there was no policy requirement to engage for this procurement” and that the Ministry of Defence has no record of discussions with the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions. Only one compliant bid was received for the overall services contract, leaving Serco to select Damen without direct government involvement.
Coaker also addressed the legal and financial issues. He said the MoD is aware of the Dutch proceedings and “will take appropriate action should a conviction occur.” He stated that Serco had assessed Damen and found “no immediate risk to delivery of the Vessel Replacement Programme,” while confirming that monitoring will continue. The minister emphasised that the MoD holds no direct contract with Damen. The subcontract is valued at around two hundred million pounds, roughly twenty two percent of the overall In Port Services package. Coaker argued that British yards would still benefit from around two hundred million pounds of maintenance work, though this has done little to reassure those concerned about the loss of higher value newbuild activity.
The discussion at Holyrood stressed that a fleet of this size could have provided several years of steady output for UK yards and helped sustain skills between major naval programmes. Comparisons were drawn with countries that deliberately use small vessel orders to stabilise their shipbuilding sectors. The procurement structure, rather than an explicit political decision, created the conditions for the work to go overseas. Once shipbuilding is embedded inside service contracts, ministers lose the ability to apply industrial priorities even when these align with stated policy objectives.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,213
Likes: 1,648
From: Ferrara
Damen have been providing vessels for years - a quick look through the 2025 "British Warships & Auxiliaries" from Navy Books shows SERCO UK are currently operating over 30 DAMEN built vessels of various types - especially tugs.
Joined: May 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 27,394
Likes: 856
From: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
SOSUS was retired/handed over to the oceanographers decades ago....
(The NAVFAC was nicknamed the 'Biscuit Factory', because it was commanded by a Capt Jacobs at the time.)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,510
Likes: 7,255
From: Peripatetic
MQ-9B AEW
https://www.ga-asi.com/airborne-early-warning/
Putting Air Dominance Within Reach
With adversary technologies and tactics rapidly advancing, airborne threats are more dangerous than ever before. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) is expanding battlespace awareness with a critical new capability: Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C). GA-ASI’s reliable and affordable solution is poised to revolutionize AEW by integrating the mission capability with the world's most proven unmanned aerial systems (UAS): the MQ-9B series of aircraft, SkyGuardian® and SeaGuardian®, as well as MQ-9B Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL)......
Putting Air Dominance Within Reach
With adversary technologies and tactics rapidly advancing, airborne threats are more dangerous than ever before. General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) is expanding battlespace awareness with a critical new capability: Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C). GA-ASI’s reliable and affordable solution is poised to revolutionize AEW by integrating the mission capability with the world's most proven unmanned aerial systems (UAS): the MQ-9B series of aircraft, SkyGuardian® and SeaGuardian®, as well as MQ-9B Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL)......
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,510
Likes: 7,255
From: Peripatetic
https://www.navylookout.com/hms-rich...-six-frigates/
HMS Richmond to be decommissioned this year – Royal Navy down to six frigates
It was confirmed yesterday at a farewell Parade in her affiliated town of Richmond in Yorkshire, that the frigate is to be retired following 31-years of service.
HMS Richmond was the last warship built by the great Swan Hunter shipyard on the Tyne and commissioned in 1995. The penultimate ships built by the yard were HMS Westminster and HMS Northumberland (commissioned 1994), both already withdrawn due to their poor material state.
Having sailed on 2 lengthy global deployments as well as serving in the Red Sea since her £56M LIFEX refit was completed in March 2020, it had become increasingly obvious that Richmond was unlikely to serve for much longer.
Despite her age, the RN has continued to invest in HMS Richmond right up to the end of her life. She was the first of four frigates to receive new engines in the form of the Power Generation Machinery Upgrade (PGMU). At the time, it was optimistically expected that this and the life extension work would see the ship serve until the early 2030s.
The PGMU turned out to be far more complex to implement than expected, but proved to be a success in service. However, the frigates’ hulls, originally designed to last about 18 years, have become unrepairable after the rigours of 30 years of operations.
In March 2025, she became the third RN vessel to receive the Naval Strike Missile outfit, equipping her with a modern anti-ship punch. She was also the first Type 23 to receive the integrated Link 16 Crypto Modernised communications system, enhancing her tactical data sharing with allied units and acting as a testbed for wider fleet upgrades under the Maritime Multi-Link programme.
Richmond served as the primary ASW combatant within the UK Carrier Strike Group deployment during 2025. In September, she conducted a transit of the Taiwan Strait, a routine right-of-navigation passage that drew monitoring responses from Chinese forces. The ship also participated in a wide range of multinational activities, including exercises and port visits in the Asia-Pacific and Mediterranean.
Coming soon after the decommissioning of HMS Lancaster, the RN will have just six Type 23 frigates left of what was once a class of 16 ships. No new frigates will become operational before late 2028, and it not yet been confirmed, but frigate numbers may even decline to five this year.
HMS Iron Duke is undergoing a planned maintenance period in Devonport due to end in March, but some sources suggest she will not return to sea due to personnel shortages; instead, her crew will transfer to HMS Kent and bring her out of refit.
Despite the decision to retire Richmond having obviously been made some time before, Ministers saidin a statement to Parliament in January, “The Royal Navy will have seven frigates in service”.
It is unclear when this year HMS Richmond will formally decommission, but it is believed she will conduct a well-deserved farewell tour of the UK as one of her final acts.
It was confirmed yesterday at a farewell Parade in her affiliated town of Richmond in Yorkshire, that the frigate is to be retired following 31-years of service.
HMS Richmond was the last warship built by the great Swan Hunter shipyard on the Tyne and commissioned in 1995. The penultimate ships built by the yard were HMS Westminster and HMS Northumberland (commissioned 1994), both already withdrawn due to their poor material state.
Having sailed on 2 lengthy global deployments as well as serving in the Red Sea since her £56M LIFEX refit was completed in March 2020, it had become increasingly obvious that Richmond was unlikely to serve for much longer.
Despite her age, the RN has continued to invest in HMS Richmond right up to the end of her life. She was the first of four frigates to receive new engines in the form of the Power Generation Machinery Upgrade (PGMU). At the time, it was optimistically expected that this and the life extension work would see the ship serve until the early 2030s.
The PGMU turned out to be far more complex to implement than expected, but proved to be a success in service. However, the frigates’ hulls, originally designed to last about 18 years, have become unrepairable after the rigours of 30 years of operations.
In March 2025, she became the third RN vessel to receive the Naval Strike Missile outfit, equipping her with a modern anti-ship punch. She was also the first Type 23 to receive the integrated Link 16 Crypto Modernised communications system, enhancing her tactical data sharing with allied units and acting as a testbed for wider fleet upgrades under the Maritime Multi-Link programme.
Richmond served as the primary ASW combatant within the UK Carrier Strike Group deployment during 2025. In September, she conducted a transit of the Taiwan Strait, a routine right-of-navigation passage that drew monitoring responses from Chinese forces. The ship also participated in a wide range of multinational activities, including exercises and port visits in the Asia-Pacific and Mediterranean.
Coming soon after the decommissioning of HMS Lancaster, the RN will have just six Type 23 frigates left of what was once a class of 16 ships. No new frigates will become operational before late 2028, and it not yet been confirmed, but frigate numbers may even decline to five this year.
HMS Iron Duke is undergoing a planned maintenance period in Devonport due to end in March, but some sources suggest she will not return to sea due to personnel shortages; instead, her crew will transfer to HMS Kent and bring her out of refit.
Despite the decision to retire Richmond having obviously been made some time before, Ministers saidin a statement to Parliament in January, “The Royal Navy will have seven frigates in service”.
It is unclear when this year HMS Richmond will formally decommission, but it is believed she will conduct a well-deserved farewell tour of the UK as one of her final acts.
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 501
Likes: 91
From: UK
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,213
Likes: 1,648
From: Ferrara
One thing that struck me - if the Navy's only active SSN disapears to Australia
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-na...rine-shortage/
for several months what will cover as escort for any UK Carrier ops? Maybe we'll have to ask the French .
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-na...rine-shortage/
for several months what will cover as escort for any UK Carrier ops? Maybe we'll have to ask the French .
Last edited by Asturias56; 23rd January 2026 at 16:05.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 205
From: aus
One thing that struck me - if the Navy's only active SSN disapears to Australia
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-na...rine-shortage/
for several months what will cover as escort for any UK Carrier ops? Maybe we'll have to ask the French .
https://www.navylookout.com/royal-na...rine-shortage/
for several months what will cover as escort for any UK Carrier ops? Maybe we'll have to ask the French .
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,213
Likes: 1,648
From: Ferrara
Oh yes - I agree totally. But where does the cover for our carriers come from? Sounds like an extended port call is coming - which will probably please the Treasury.
Joined: Apr 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 4,914
Likes: 608
From: surfing, watching for sharks
Upon the subs arrival, what is its mission? Training the locals or augmenting the RAN in the region? If the later, be curious where the tasking comes from.
Joined: Jun 2007
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 1,880
Likes: 495
From: Beyond the Blue Horizon
Another ship for the Chilean Navy perhaps? I spent New Year in Valparaiso opposite the naval base and everything there was ex UK or Dutch with only a US Oiler from anywhere else.
Cheers
Mr Mac
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 241
Likes: 41
From: South Glos
Remember that the carriers are supposed to be NATO assets. When we pointed out many years ago that the RN couldn’t man the carriers and the escorts at the same time, we were told that they were NATO assets and that a NATO escort group would coalesce around them when necessary. This would have to include the subsurface escorts considering the dire state of RN SSN support facilities causing the appalling current availability.
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 241
Likes: 41
From: South Glos
The number I’ve heard is less than five.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,510
Likes: 7,255
From: Peripatetic
You have to question where they think they will find the qualified manpower to man the 13 new T26/T31they promise will be brought into service by 2035.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,213
Likes: 1,648
From: Ferrara
Bit of both I suspect - tasking will probably be Australian with overall RN approval - after all the UK is dependent on the OZ/NZ part of 5 eyes for information in that neck of the woods anyway. I doubt there's much specificaly of UK-only interest east of India
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,213
Likes: 1,648
From: Ferrara
NATO?? I thought it was in the process of being abolished?? We're supposed to stand on our own two feet.
And yes, this thread is full of historic posts saying that we'd never be able to man the carriers and also the rest of the navy. Some disagreed vehemently - and some even deny the issue now.
And yes, this thread is full of historic posts saying that we'd never be able to man the carriers and also the rest of the navy. Some disagreed vehemently - and some even deny the issue now.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,213
Likes: 1,648
From: Ferrara
Thinking of which.. where is WEBF? hasn't posted in 2 months.......................
PS he's quiet but still around - posted on ww2 veterans about 10 days ago.............................
PS he's quiet but still around - posted on ww2 veterans about 10 days ago.............................
Last edited by Asturias56; 25th January 2026 at 10:05.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 205
From: aus
My understanding training and familiarisation are the main two. Also checking the berthing setup like power as the ameican and UK subs have different berthing requirement. Also imagine it will be doing short sorties out with australian submariners as part of the crew
USN bought one of their sub tenders to perth to do a maintainence on one of their subs in perth and about 12 RAN personal were involved in it
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,967
Likes: 100
From: Devon
Not so many years ago they did manage to find enough people to keep something like seven of eleven (post 2021 review) frigates; and most of the destroyers, and an LPD, and both carriers, so where have all the sailors gone? I know that some of them are sent to warships under construction, but there has to be more things at play. Have the penny pinchers been cutting maintenance and spares to save a few quid? Unfortunately the situation facing the SSNs suggests that this is an issue, as the submarine service is not struggling with personnel retention as much as the surface flotilla.
Courting disaster for the sake of saving just small (in Government terns) sums. I wonder if questions have been asked in Parliament about frigate numbers suddenly falling of off a cliff?
NATO?? I thought it was in the process of being abolished?? We're supposed to stand on our own two feet.
And yes, this thread is full of historic posts saying that we'd never be able to man the carriers and also the rest of the navy. Some disagreed vehemently - and some even deny the issue now.
And yes, this thread is full of historic posts saying that we'd never be able to man the carriers and also the rest of the navy. Some disagreed vehemently - and some even deny the issue now.
Some of disagreed as it was obviously not true. Back when Ben Wallace announced his review we had eleven frigates and managed to find personnel to put two thirds of them to sea or a readiness, and an LPD, and both carriers...
We are short of personnel, and when ships in build demand personnel they have to come from somewhere, and we can blame the idiot Cameron for reneging on and increase of 1500 personnel for the RN in 2015, after he made promises to back benchers about not cutting 'troop' (ie Army) numbers and he was unable to increase the overall number of people in uniform.
Some of us disagreed as it was not true, and because simple explanations rarely answer complex questions. There is also the small issue of the war at sea - surely nobody is suggesting that that would be easier to win (or deter) without the carrier? Just before the CSG25 deployment, an article about the Royal Navy's forthcoming CSG25 deployment noted that:
The value of the UK Carrier strike group in protecting Europe is often underplayed. Not only is the carrier a declared NATO maritime command platform, but carriers would be employed to interdict Russian submarines and aircraft coming ‘around the corner’...
When did the RN Director of Public Relations stop producing content like this 1993(?) video? There is no talk of the jets being there to defend the carrier (only), or the ASW helicopters aboard the carrier being portrayed as being for self defence of the carrier and totally separate from the from the frigates and their ASW capabilities.
[4:40] As well as intercepting other aircraft that may threaten the task group, Sea Harriers...
The dumbed down version would talk of intercepting aircraft that may threaten the carrier, as if the fighter is a self defence system like a point defence weapon aboard the ship, and that there are no other high value units that need to be defended.
[6:12] Today the carrier is a sea control vessel, leading a task group and using her Sea Harriers to sanitise the sea for hundreds of miles around.
Not just the Sea Harriers, but the more important point is that both jets and helicopters defend at long range, far beyond that of ship launched weapons, providing a large area in which hostiles can be engaged.
[7:02] The task group commander is launching the carrier's Airborne Early Warning Sea King helicopters. These increase the range of radar detection well beyond the horizon, and ensure that no unfriendly aircraft can get close to the task group without being discovered.
The point being that once detected they can be intercepted if you have nearby fighters, such as on CAP or on the carrier deck.
[7:40] As part of the task group, a Type 23 frigate is carrying out its primary role of Anti Submarine Warfare which she conducts with her own radar, sonar, and communications systems, as well as her own Anti Submarine helicopter, working in conjunction with those from the carrier...
In other words the ASW helicopters aboard the carrier provide a capability for the task group as a whole, and that multiple helicopters are needed for continuous ASW protection.
[8:50] In a task group, the characteristics of each ship's weapons and detection systems are used to the advantage of the whole force...
This film/video was made before the 'end of history' and the assumption that conventional capabilities were not needed, before the years of having a carrier in the Adriatic to support forces ashore and to protect NATO warships operating near a hostile coast, before many deployments to the Arabian Gulf when size limitations caused problems, and before the days of day of unwinnable land wars being seen as the focus of defence.
A few months ago a former carrier critic wrote this article:
Running on empty – how the Royal Navy nearly kept HMS Ark Royal into the 1980s
After the East of Suez withdrawal, Ark Royal operated mainly in the Atlantic and Mediterranean, carrying F-4 Phantoms, Buccaneers, Gannets and Sea Kings. She remained a potent platform, one of the few RN ships capable of nuclear strike with WE177 tactical weapons. Crucially, she fitted neatly into NATO war plans, able to defend herself [and her task group] against Soviet air attack while striking surface ships and submarines. By 1973, she was NATO’s sole non-US fixed-wing carrier, making her unique.
By 1978, however, the RN judged her too worn out to continue. Resources were shifting to the Invincible-class ‘through-deck cruisers’ for ASW helicopters and Sea Harriers. The gap between Ark’s decommissioning, Hermes’ Sea Harrier refit, and Invincibles’ arrival would be covered by recommissioning HMS Bulwark as a helicopter carrier.
SACLANT commander Admiral Kidd, however, was alarmed by the wider reduction in US Navy carrier forces assigned to his Command, which in wartime would play a vital role in getting military reinforcements across the Atlantic to Europe. In February 1978, he warned First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Terence Lewin that NATO faced a severe carrier shortage: “By the end of 1978… we need eight carrier task groups for reinforcement and resupply of Europe, and I shall be fortunate to have more than one, repeat one, American task group to cover the entire Atlantic and Norwegian Sea.” His blunt plea – “Terry, we need Ark Royal” – forced the Admiralty to reconsider...
Enduring lessons
People are the critical constraint. The RN’s history since 1945 shows repeated failure to balance ships with crews. Ark’s disposal was driven not just by money or condition, but by personnel shortages. Today, the Navy faces the same challenge: too few engineers and sailors to keep the fleet fully active.
Reserve fleets are costly illusions. Calls to keep old ships “just in case” ignore the reality that maintaining credibility for reactivation absorbs almost as many resources as keeping them in commission. By the time they are ready, the crisis has usually passed.
Royal Navy Carriers matter disproportionately. Admiral Kidd’s 1978 reminder of the unique value of RN carriers remains valid. Today, with the USN focused on China, NATO may again rely heavily on Britain’s Queen Elizabeth class to secure the Atlantic. Nearly fifty years after Ark Royal paid off, Royal Navy strike carriers continue to provide NATO with capabilities far out of proportion to their number.
Previously posted here: The Aircraft Carrier and Sea Control (carriers needed in the Atlantic and elsewhere for Air Defence and ASW - due to Maths/Physics/Geography)
As to the question of where I have been, most days I have felt like the Sly Stallone character in the film Demolition Man when things appear so dystopic he says "Put me back in the freezer...".
Remember, seeking simple solutions to complex problems has just given us more complex problems!
Last edited by WE Branch Fanatic; 27th January 2026 at 08:16.